REVIEW — TFW-42 / Phase A: Conventions & Templates¶
Date: 2026-04-30 Author: Reviewer (Antigravity) Verdict: ✅ APPROVE Review Mode: docs RF: RF Phase A TS: TS Phase A Stage files:
review/map.md,review/verify.md,review/judge.mdThis file is a synthesis of stage findings. Reference stage files for raw evidence.
1. Map¶
The executor rewrote conventions.md §4 to establish a unified research/iterN/ container, renamed 4 stage file templates with numeric prefixes (1_briefing.md → 4_challenge.md), enriched the iterations.yaml schema with optional agent and sources fields, normalized phase folder naming from PascalCase to kebab-case, added a 5-row agent selection guidance table, and updated the RES template. Two approved deviations: §4 section reordering (coordinator-approved in ONB) and multi-phase tree alignment with new container convention.
2. Verify¶
| # | What was checked | Result | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| V1 | conventions.md §4 Research subfolder (lines 131-150) | ✅ | Single research/ container, iterN/ pattern, numbered stages, co-located RES.md all confirmed |
| V2 | conventions.md §4 iterations.yaml schema (lines 166-190) | ✅ | agent + sources commented-out as optional, res_file paths use research/iterN/RES.md, no dropped fields, "traceability, not dispatch" text present |
| V3 | .tfw/templates/research/ directory listing |
✅ | 4 numbered files present, 0 unnumbered files |
| V4 | conventions.md §4 Agent selection guidance (lines 192-204) | ✅ | 5-row table, no tool brand names, "guidance, not prescription" footer |
| V5 | conventions.md §4 Phase folder naming (lines 113-125, 210-227) | ✅ | phase-{x} format, phase-a examples, 0 PhaseA matches |
| V6 | .tfw/templates/RES.md line 15 |
✅ | Updated to 1_briefing.md in iteration folder |
| V7 | conventions.md Review subfolder reference (line 208) | ✅ | Updated to research/iterN/1_briefing.md |
Verification at 117% (7/6 files). Zero discrepancies. 7 knowledge citations verified, 0 hallucinations. Raw log: see
review/verify.md.
3. Judge¶
| # | Check | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DoD met? (all TS acceptance criteria) | ✅ | All 6 ACs verified. Each sub-item confirmed against actual file content (verify.md V1-V7) |
| 2 | Philosophy aligned (matches HL design philosophy) | ✅ | All 6 applicable HL §7 principles enforced: locality (V1), sort order (V3), container (V1), consistent casing (V5), optional enrichment (V2), tool-agnostic (V4) |
| 3 | Tech debt documented | ✅ | RF §5 has 5 observations with file/line references |
| 4 | Style & standards | ✅ | Formatting consistent with existing conventions.md. YAML indentation correct. Table style matches |
| 5 | Observations collected | ✅ | 5 observations, all typed and actionable (4 for Phase B/C, 1 historical) |
| 6 | RF completeness (§6-8 present) | ✅ | §6 Fact Candidates, §7 Strategic Insights, §8 Diagrams — all present with explicit N/A content |
| 7 | Content quality (docs mode) | ✅ | Logical section ordering, accurate examples, complete coverage, consistent tone |
| 8 | Source verification (docs mode) | ✅ | 7 HL §7.2 citations verified — all resolve to existing knowledge items |
4. Verdict¶
✅ APPROVE
Clean execution of a well-scoped documentation restructuring task. All 6 acceptance criteria met with zero discrepancies at 117% verification coverage. Both deviations from TS (section reordering, multi-phase tree update) were justified — the first was pre-approved in ONB, the second follows logically from AC-1. Observations are actionable and correctly scoped to Phase B/C.
No "No fact candidates" or "No strategic insights" concerns — this is a pure structural refactoring of existing conventions with no user interaction during execution that would generate strategic knowledge.
5. Tech Debt Collected¶
| # | Source | Severity | File | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TD-111 | RF obs. #1 | Med | .tfw/compilable_contract.md (L56, L78) |
References PhaseA/ in resolution rules — will break on kebab-case convention |
→ Phase B/C or dedicated task |
| TD-112 | RF obs. #2 | Med | .tfw/workflows/handoff.md (L140-141) |
Multi-Phase Task Flow example uses HL__PhaseA, TS__PhaseA, RF__PhaseA |
→ Phase B |
| TD-113 | RF obs. #3 | Med | .tfw/workflows/plan.md (L134-136) |
Multi-phase structure example uses PhaseA/, HL__PhaseA__, TS__PhaseA__ |
→ Phase B |
| TD-114 | RF obs. #4 | Med | .tfw/workflows/research/base.md (L53) |
References research/briefing.md and researchN/briefing.md — needs update to research/iterN/1_briefing.md |
→ Phase B |
RF obs. #5 (CHANGELOG.md historical reference) — not collected. Historical entries should not be retroactively modified.
6. Traces Updated¶
- [ ] README Task Board — status updated
- [ ] HL status — updated if phase completes
- [ ] project_config.yaml — initial_seq incremented if needed
- [ ] Other project files — checked for stale info
- [ ] tfw-docs: N/A (Phase A of multi-phase — defer to task completion)
- [ ] tfw-knowledge: N/A (no fact candidates generated)
7. Fact Candidates¶
No fact candidates. This was a pure documentation restructuring with no user interaction that revealed new project knowledge.
REVIEW — TFW-42 / Phase A: Conventions & Templates | 2026-04-30